While Christians Are Ignored Or Told To ‘Be Tolerant’, UK Government Creates Special Office For Jews, Declares It Will Inflict The “Most Robust Punishments” For Charges Of “Anti-Semitism”

Christianity has largely vanished from most of Western Europe, as the structures and remnants of the past remain but the people do not believe. In England, a nation with a Christian history going back many centuries, has since the Protestant Revolution when King Henry VIII declared himself the head of the church in his nation gone quickly down a spiral into nationalism and now nationalistic nihilism, where the people are apathetic to religion and largely do not have any beliefs at all.

Christian churches are largely empty, and they are regularly defaced or disrespected in the UK, and people who express Christian believes, which is largely now limited to immigrants from Africa or Eastern Europe, are harassed, attacked, and sometimes arrested and charged with being ‘hateful.’ Christians are told they have to ‘be tolerant,’ and if they are not being harassed, many times they are just ignored.

However, the UK government has shown herself to stand up for the rights of many other groups. Muslims are mostly given license to promote Islam, and sodomites are given license to promote sodomite perversity. But perhaps the group which has the most privileges and protections are the Jews, who not only have historically supported Islam against Christendom throughout history and are well-known historical advocates of sodomite behavior going back even to ancient times as the Bible itself notes, but
The

(Article is being reprinted in full due to the fact that JC.com has disabled archiving, read full text here)

Government’s antisemitism adviser pledges ‘most robust consequences’ for Jew-haters
John Mann MP said he was determined to prevent ‘good, young people’ from leaving the UK due to antisemitism

The government’s new antisemitism adviser has vowed to make sure that those responsible for the spreading of hatred against the Jewish people in this country face the “most robust consequences”.

Speaking after his first public engagement in the new job at Finchley United Synagogue, Kinloss, last Shabbat, John Mann MP said he had accepted the role to prevent “good people, young people” from deciding they no longer belonged in the UK, or in Europe, because of rising anti-Jewish racism.

Mr Mann, who is quitting as the Labour MP for Bassetlaw to sit as an independent in the House of Lords, revealed there would be “an appropriate budget” from government for his role, which will last for five years.

He admitted: “It doesn’t stop future governments from sacking me – but nobody will be able to simply forget me or my role.”

The outspoken opponent of antisemitism added: “I am independent of government – former Prime Minister Theresa May put me in her Resignation Honours – and frankly I will be doing this role whether people like it or not for the next five years.”

Setting out what he sees as the key focus of his new position, Mr Mann spoke of the “dichotomy” of “how not to overstate the problem so people become irrationally fearful of their everyday existence while at the same time not understating the problem.”

He said that we should be “thankful” the UK has not witnessed yet the “murder of people going about their everyday life simply because they were Jewish” as has been the case with atrocities in France, Belgium and the United States.

“Therefore my observation with regard to the balance of overstatement and understatement (in the UK) – the biggest danger is that we will understate the problem.”

Mr Mann warned that in his opinion the rise of antisemitism on British university campuses was a huge issue.

He said there was a vital role to be played by Jewish communal bodies and student leaders in dealing with this problem.

While physical attacks on British Jews were still rare, Mr Mann spoke of the growth of “pernicious, silent, isolating disdain” shown towards Jewish students “from hostile elements in their universities.”

In his new role, Mr Mann said he would work to ensure the IHRA definition of antisemitism “is used in its most effective way by our major institutions, football clubs, universities – this is achievable.”

Singling out the vital role that will be played by the Community Security Trust, Mr Mann said he would be “working and meeting with Jewish community leaders at all times.”

He also said there was a huge impact to be made through what he described as “use of the non-law, civil society and good organisation.”

Mr Mann added: “If we do not, the reality will be that good people will leave.

“Not necessarily quickly – but good people will not see their future on the continent of Europe or on the UK because they are Jewish, and they wish for their identity to be proudly held at all times.

“We are not going to accept – and government is not going to accept – that impingement on civil liberties in this country.”

Mr Mann said that his “motto” in his new role would be “consistency and consequences.”

He explained: “There will be a consistency in my approach and that will be rigorously followed through to make sure it happens.

“And there will be consequences for the antisemites – whether they like it or not.”

He said he would be acting on the advice of the Jewish community who would be required to “tell me what they think should happen.”

Mr Mann said: “I will be advising on how they get that message through to government.”

He added: “History shows us that the Jewish community has always been the canary in the cage for the rest of society.

“This battle benefits everyone in this country.

“I will be going around making sure everyone understands this, with every opportunity I get.

“This is a battle for our country, this is a battle of our country and of our people.

“If we define our values – the things that make us British, then this is the number one battle.

“That we stand up against discrimination. That we do not allow the Jewish community to be attacked in the way it has been.

“And that when it is, we make sure that the perpetrators face the most robust consequences.”

Now in fairness to Jews living in the UK and as a whole, it is not good to incite hatred against them for the sake of hatred. Yet this applies to anybody, since one must oppose evil but do it for the sake of what is right, moral, good, and proper.

There are many people who use criticism of Judaism to advance their own eugenic ends. This is not good. However, the reality is that often times, criticism of Judaism is intentionally equivocated with ‘hatred’ in order to have a legal option to shut down and destroy people who expose and discuss what are legitimately disordered and sometimes the outright evil teachings of the Talmud and the Kabbalah, let alone the actions of Jews who execute said commands.

The question then becomes, why do Jews get a preferred chair that advocates for them, when Christians are openly harassed and persecuted and have to defend themselves for preaching scripture?

Likewise, as always, what constitutes an “anti-semite”? Is it a person who truly encourages a hatred of Judaism, or is it a person who opposes contemporary Jewish beliefs and practices because of moral or religious reasons?

For example, is it “anti-semitic” to expose Jews who call for racism and violence or when they say that 100,000 non-Jewish lives are not worth a “single Jewish fingernail”, or when major Jewish rabbis call Africans monkeys and only “white people” are worth praying for? What about Jews who commit violence against Christians and defend anti-Christian hatred while promoting National Socialism? Is it “anti-semitic” to repeat the declarations of Jews when they boast that Jewish life and homosexuality in Soviet Russia were inseparable? It is “anti-semitic” to talk about the influence of Jewish money in US politics when Jews themselves brag about buying off US political candidates, or how the American porn industry is a creation of Jewish perverts forcing their will on the court system?

These are the questions that matter.

It is true there is corruption in every religious group without exception. Evil of all kinds should be exposed because truth is what matters, as it sets a man free. This is not limited to any one group either. In other words, one should not “expose the Muslims” without addressing fellow Christians, or pagans, or Jews.

Yet this is the concern, because there is a clear pattern from history of major Jewish figures attempting to hide their misdeeds, even going so far as to attack and attempt to destroy the lives of fellow Jews of good will who also want to expose such evils for the sake of moral righteousness.

It is good to protect Jewish people from evil violence, but “protection” cannot include using the law to cover for moral license, nor can it be used as a shield to abuse Christians or other persons with.

Source